The AIG compromise: a glass half full?

I have asked the employees of AIG Financial Products to step up and do
the right thing. Specifically, I have asked
those who received retention payments of $100,000 or more to return at
least half of those payments.

Questions:

1. How will this be enforced? (What if an employee says, um, "No"?)

2. Isn't there anything meaningful or rational about "at least half"? Is it picked to maximize psychological impact? Or picked out of a hat?

3. Why would Congress find this to be adequate, when they are proposing to tax back 100% of the bonuses?

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

Conor Clarke is the editor, with Michael Kinsley, of Creative Capitalism. He was previously a fellow at The Atlantic and an editor at The Guardian.